to present a petition, which he said was known throughout Ireland by the name of the Rotunda Petition. He felt honoured in being selected to present it to the House, and he hoped he should not be considered guilty of having attached undue importance to it by the notice which he had given of his intention to do so. The petition asked for Catholic emancipation. In this particular it was not remarkable; for it merely expressed the general, he might almost say the national, feeling of Ireland; but if the number of the signatures to the petition were considered, if, above all, the character of the great national assembly at which it was agreed on, were considered, the petition was well worthy the serious attention of the House. The meeting at which it was carried was not a Catholic meeting, it was not a Protestant meeting; it was not convened under the influence of the Catholic Association: it was not convened under the influence of the Brunswick Association: it did not assemble for the purpose of promoting any party views; but it was a meeting, the first of the kind that had taken place in Ireland, composed of all classes of men, Catholics and Protestants, of Catholic peers and Protestant peers, of Catholic gentry and Protestant gentry, of Catholic lawyers and Protestant lawyers—the Irish people, he might say, assembled, as if determined to sink all differences of creed in the common name of Christians, and to unite in expressing to the House their opinions with respect to the state of Ireland, of which they were best capable of forming an opinion. They declared it to be their opinion, that the penal laws were not only grievous to the Catholics, but attended with the most unfortunate results both to Catholics and Protestants. This question should not be called the Catholic, but the Protestant, question: for the Protestants of Ireland were more concerned in the success of it, than the persons who might be regarded as more immediately its object. The Protestants of Ireland were placed in a situation in which they could no longer continue. The bad laws had created a sore in the Catholic part of the population, whilst the Protestant part had been branded with undue marks of partiality and affection; and the passing of a law which would put Catholics and Protestants on an equality, was the only measure of salvation that could be devised, for the handful of Protestants who were surrounded by a crowd of enemies. Some hon. members had asserted that which was untrue, when they stated, that the great body of the Protestants of Ireland were adverse to Catholic emancipation. In the petition he was about to present was embodied the Protestant declaration of Ireland; and, if any member was disposed to doubt the correctness of his statement; when he said that the majority of the Irish Protestants were favourable to the adjustment of the question, he would advise him to look at the names which were attached to this declaration. It was signed by two dukes, seven marquises, twenty-six earls, eleven viscounts, two counts, twenty-two barons, thirty-five baronets, fifty-two members of the House of Commons, and upwards of two thousand persons of other rank. Amongst those who had signed the declaration were to be found individuals, the most distinguished for private virtue and attachment to the public interests of Ireland. The parties who signed it had not done so for the advancement of the Catholic power, or to introduce Catholic domination, or a predominance of Catholic influence. Their object was the advancement of Protestant interest and the support of the constitution. That the feeling of the majority of the landed interest of Ireland were in support of the principle asserted in the petition, could not be denied. Two-thirds of the Irish members of parliament, and he believed he might say a still greater proportion, were its advocates. The recent election for a representative peer in Ireland proved that the majority of the aristocracy of that country were also decidedly favourable to the same principle. The election was a contest between the supporters and opponents of emancipation, and the sentiments of the Irish peerage were clearly evinced in support of that measure, by their return of a nobleman whose family had always been favourable to it. Yet after this evidence before the House, they had heard some hon. members assert, that a majority of the Protestants of Ireland were opposed to concession. It was, he admitted, true, that a large number of the Protestant yeomanry of Ireland were opposed to the measure of concession; and the opposition thus created was of itself an evidence of the necessity of an amicable settlement of the question. Those who were best acquainted with the state of Ireland, would admit, that in Armagh, and some other parts of the country, where the grievances were most felt, there the opposition between Catholics and Protestants were found to be most violent, approaching to a desire for mutual extermination. Yet he had no doubt, that if the question were once brought to an amicable settlement, in the only way in which it was possible to settle it amicably, by concession, we should, in a short time, find, amongst Irishmen of all classes, without religious distinction, that cordiality and union which existed amongst them every where but in Ireland; and that from thenceforward, the animosities and heart-burnings which now made them a divided people would be completely buried in oblivion.

said, that considering the character of the petition, and the high rank, great wealth, and powerful influence of those by whom it was signed, he thought the hon. member who presented it was called on to enter more fully into its subject than an ordinary petition would require, and to direct to it the particular attention of the House; which he had done so ably, and to which the character of the individuals, and their extensive knowledge of Irish affairs, had the strongest claim. In all respects this petition seemed a contrast to the English petitions which, night after night, poured into that House from all parts of the country, in opposition to the intentions of his majesty's ministers. The petition before the House looked at the question as one purely of a political nature; as one essentially Irish; and it was in that sense alone it had been introduced to the notice of the House by the hon. member. In the English petitions, as far as he could judge, the feelings of the petitioners arose from an apprehension on the ground of religion, rather than from a fear of political danger. He respected those feelings in the great body of the people, and he had no doubt that it was by working on those feelings, that such a number of petitions had been obtained; because the people believed that their religion was involved by the proceedings in parliament. These, he admitted, were honest prejudices, and deserved the attention of the legislature; and he was not one of those who did not think them worthy of serious attention. He thought, however, that it was most important that those who were so active in getting up these petitions should, if possible, be prevailed upon to take a different course from that which they had hitherto pursued, and instead of hawking them from door to door, and putting them in public places to which large numbers of the lower orders were in the habit of resorting, to call public meetings. There was no part of the country where there could not be found some men of education, intelligence, and sound views on this question, who would no doubt at tend at such meetings and allay the fears which were excited, by detailing what was the real state of the question. If such meetings were held, and he was sorry they were not, men would be found who, instead of proving, or endeavouring to prove, that this was a question between the Protestant creed and that of the church of Rome, would show that it was purely one of a political character; or that, if it were a question between the two creeds, the only way in which that of the Protestant could expect a triumph would be to open a fair field for each; for in that case the Protestant religion would most certainly be triumphant. Such a man might say, that if there were any apprehension of danger from withholding an equal participation of rights and privileges from all his majesty's subjects, the only way to remove that danger would be to repeal the laws which created the disabilities, that that course would undoubtedly be best for the interests of that church, in support of which the intended measures had been graciously recommended by his majesty to the consideration of parliament. He had no hesitation in stating emphatically, that the measure of concession was inevitable [hear, hear]. He did not mean that this necessity was physical; but he would say, that there was a great moral necessity for considering this subject with a view to concession. He had heard much in that House and out of it, of settling the question; but he had never heard any which could bring it to a conclusion, except, indeed, what had been intimated by a gallant officer on a former evening (general Archdall); namely a direct appeal to the sword. That gallant officer, speaking of his constituents, had said, that their ancestors had once fought the Catholics, and that they themselves were ready to fight them again. With persons so heated, it would not be very useful to reason; but in that very state of feeling which showed one party ready to fight with the other, he saw the absolute necessity of concession. Another measure, and one in appearance more pacific, was to dissolve the parliament, and appeal to the people. Dissolve the parliament! Why, fortunately for this country, the Crown could not take such a step without the concurrence of its responsible advisers. It would be insanity itself to suppose that the present ministry could advise such a measure: but if they did not, by whom could such advice be given? It would be insanity to suppose that, as public men, they could advise such a course—especially after the honest and manly avowal of a change in their opinions on this subject, which had been made by the noble duke at the head of the government, by the right hon. the Secretary of State for the Home Department, by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and by other influential members of his majesty's government. But then, if men of their opinions could not be found to advise such a course, would it not be still more insane to suppose that a set of men could be brought into the cabinet on mixed principles, with a determination to remain neutral? That would now be impossible. He had no hesitation in saying, that the day of neutrality was gone by. It had lasted much too long; and he was glad that the time had at last arrived, when the Crown had taken it upon itself to give advice which would put an end to neutrality on this most important question. He would say then unequivocally, that an appeal to the people by a dissolution of parliament was impossible. But though such a measure was pacific in name, would it be so in reality? He apprehended that it would be far otherwise. In the present state of excited feeling throughout the country—a feeling which must be still more excited by the stimulants of a general election—he could not contemplate such a measure without the utmost alarm and dismay. In this view of the question, then, he would repeat, that the measure of concession was inevitable. The people of this country must make up their minds to it; and whatever might be the feelings of some on the subject, they should give way to measures by which much danger and confusion would inevitably be prevented. He would say, that it was the moral duty of every man, whether in that House or out of it, to exert himself to correct the mistaken opinions which were spread on this question, and not let it go forth uncontradicted, that the intended measures would have an effect injurious to the established religion. It was the duty of every man to show, that nothing was intended which could endanger the Protestant establishments in Church and State; but that, on the contrary, the object of those measures was, as their effect would be, to give greater security to all our establishments, By these means, the people would be taught to submit with the same loyal confidence in the measures suggested by the wisdom of government, and sanctioned by the deliberate sense of the legislature, which had distinguished them on all other occasions.

said, he rose to express his hearty concurrence in what had fallen from the right hon. member for Liverpool, and particularly in the latter part of his address. That attempts were making, in different parts of the country, to defeat the measure recommended to parliament he believed; but they were neither so extensive nor so powerful as the right hon. gentleman seemed to think: that attempts were making to delude the less thinking, less educated, and less enlightened portion of the community, into the belief, that the intended measure was one which would interfere with their religion, no person who at all observed what was passing in parliament and out of it, could entertain any doubt. He trusted, however, to the good sense of the people—he trusted to their naturally kind feeling—he trusted even to the little time which must elapse before the introduction of the intended measure, for a removal of much of the prejudice which existed with respect to it. For one, he concurred with the right hon. gentleman, that in discussing this question it should be argued as a political, not as a religious question—that it was now a question of right and justice, and that we should lay our account to consider it as one of inevitable necessity. Of the three modes of disposing of it, that which would pretend to let it remain as it was, was the least possible: the only practicable or possible one was that which looked to its amicable settlement by concession. To go back to the repeal of the concessions of 1778, 1779, and 1793—for there were not wanting some who, in their excess of zeal for what they considered the constitution, would go even thus far,—he held to be one of the wildest chimeras that ever entered the most visionary brain. That parliament would adopt the only mode in which it could be settled, he firmly hoped and believed. As to the notion, that a government could now be formed on a principle of neutrality, or on the principle of opposition, it was what ninety-nine men in a hundred of common understandings would scout as impracticable; and as to a government on a mixed principle, it was still more so. He would venture to say, that no man in that or in the other House of parliament, be his want of sense, his thoughtlessness, or his inconsiderate violence what they might, would stand up and say, that a neutral could be exchanged for an unconceding cabinet, or that either could be formed on a basis which could last much longer than the time occupied in naming it. To talk of the dangers to which the country would be exposed from concession, though he had heard much less of that in that House than out of doors, was so childish, absurd, and ludicrous, that he knew nothing like it, except the still greater absurdity of setting down as unimportant the only real fear which ought to affect men's minds on this question:—he meant, that wholesome fear which should operate on a great statesman; not a fear for his place—not a fear for the personal safety of himself or his connexions, or party, but a fear for his country—a fear of the danger of discord, and the possibility of civil war; and when he heard a gallant officer talk of Protestants being ready to fight with Catholics—he was not sure whether the gallant officer had not used the "word" but whether he had or not, the word "ready" struck him to have been used in a tone as if the will were not wanting—when he heard men calmly talking of such differences between his majesty's subjects as created civil discord, and tended, perhaps, to civil war, who could say that there was not ground for fear? That the noble duke at the head of government should be accessible to the wise and statesmanlike fear of not plunging the country into a danger from which even he might not be able to rescue it, was not only justifiable but praiseworthy. In the presence of the right hon Secretary opposite, he was less inclined to say any thing in his praise, than he should otherwise be; but not having had an opportunity before of alluding in terms of just praise to his manly avowal of the change which had taken place in his mind on the great question, he would state, that his silence on that subject hitherto must be attributed to any motive rather than to a disinclination to join most heartily in all the panegyrics of the most enthusiastic of his admirers.

said, that it was not his wish to take from the importance of any petition presented to that House; but after what had been said on the one now before it, he could not avoid offering a few words. From the statement made by the hon. member who presented it, it would appear as if this petition was the result of a kind of national convention; as if there had been a general meeting of the Catholics and Protestants of Ireland. But what would the House say when he informed them that the meeting from which the petition emanated had been called for the express purpose, and for that alone, of giving its sanction to certain resolutions which had been already agreed to. In proof of this he might mention, that when a gentleman who attended the meeting rose to offer his opinions against the petition, he was called to order by the chairman, who stated that they had assembled only to give effect to the resolution which had been before agreed to. That resolution was the Protestant declaration. He believed that the noble lords and gentlemen whose names were at the head of the list had signed it willingly enough, but he could not attribute the same motives to the whole of the two thousand persons whose names appeared to it. Those other parties were influenced by motives which he would explain; for he would state facts. It was well known to the hon. member for Armagh, that the Catholic Association had exercised a coercive power over public opinion in Ireland; if indeed that could be called public opinion which was expressed under the despotism which that body exercised over its fellow-subjects. In that body, it was known that notice had been given of a non-intercourse resolution, which was to have the effect of preventing the dealing of Protestants with Catholics; and it was worthy of remark that this notice made its appearance about the time of the Protestant declaration. That declaration was sent through the country, and the notice of motion in the Catholic Association had equal publicity. The consequence was, that every Protestant who kept a shop, and depended in any degree on the custom of his Catholic fellow-subjects, was threatened with the loss of that custom, and the starvation of his family, if he refused to sign. When this was considered, it should not be wondered that two thousand names had been obtained to the declaration. But when the public press exposed the anti-Christian feeling in which such a resolution originated, some persons interfered who should have interfered two months before; and then the resolution was given up, and it was made a matter of charity to refrain from pressing it. He could state a fact in illustration of the use which had been made of that declaration with respect to signatures. A friend of his, a silk-manufacturer of Dublin, who was a Protestant, called at the shop of a mercer in that city, a Roman Catholic, whom he was in the habit of supplying with silk. The Protestant declaration, as it was called, was lying on the counter, and the mercer said, "Will you sign this?" His friend said, he had hitherto kept himself from interfering in politics, and did not wish to sign. "Then," said the mercer, "if you do not, you cannot have our custom." His friend, who was a man of independent spirit, was indignant at this threat, and replied—"Ma'am," his friend was addressing himself to the lady of the house, who was in the shop at the time, and who was the spokesmaster on the occasion,—"Ma'am, I have several Catholics in my employment, and what would you think of me, if I were to discharge them on account of our difference of religion? I have too much Protestant feeling to take such a course; and, from the same feeling, I will not allow the threat you hold out to influence me in what my conscience does not approve." His friend left the shop, and some silks which he had sent as patterns for an order about to be given, were next day sent home. So much for the means resorted to to obtain signatures to the Protestant declaration. He thanked the right hon. member for Liverpool, for the value he attached to the opinions of Irish Protestants on this subject, from their local knowledge of Irish interests; but respectable as were, no doubt, many of the parties who signed the petition, they were nothing as a body, compared with those who had signed petitions already presented, and others which were about to be presented, taking a very different view of the question.

said, he would first notice the anecdote which the hon. member for Dublin had introduced, by way of an enlivener into his speech, and would merely say, that the Dublin silk-mercer had told him a very different story from that which he appeared to have told to the hon. member. All that he could gather from the story was, that the individual who had addressed the wife of the silk-mercer, was a very ungallant person indeed. But, letting the story pass for as much as it was worth, what did it prove?— the dreadful condition of society in Ireland. The noble duke at the head of his majesty's government, and the right hon. Secretary opposite, if they had not come forward to check it, would have grossly neglected the peace of that country. If ever there was an occasion on which it was incumbent for Irish gentlemen to come forward with a declaration of their sentiments, it was when a petition, signed by the most influential persons in Ireland, in respect of education, intelligence, and property, was presented to the notice of parliament. That petition had originated in the following circumstance:—The hon. member for Dublin, in establishing the Brunswick clubs in Ireland, had given commencement to this Association. The friends of the Catholics residing in Ireland, were surrounded by small clubs, often consisting of not more than half a dozen individuals, of whom the parson was generally one—which led to a very considerable annoyance. To get rid of this annoyance, they thought it their duty to have a public meeting in Dublin, and in that meeting, they determined to follow the principle adopted in the Brunswick clubs, of which the hon. member for Dublin had the credit of being the original promoter; that was, they determined to have no individual amongst them who was opposed to the object of their meeting. It was from a meeting so convened, that the present petition originated; and that meeting would never have taken place, if the divided state of Ireland had not rendered it imperatively necessary. He returned his grateful thanks to those gentlemen who had supported the cause of the Catholics, until it had reached its present promising state: but, in returning them his thanks, he must say, that the triumph was not wholly theirs. Many foul calumnies had been propagated against the Catholic Association. This was not the time for either examining or refuting them. He would content himself with saying, that it was mainly owing to the exertions of that Association, that the question had been brought to its present favourable condition.

said, he was as desirous as any gentleman to have this question brought to a fair issue, but he should like to know, whether it had hitherto been conducted upon fair terms to both parties interested in it. He should like to ask, whether the Castle of Dublin had not thrown its weight into one of the scales at the time when the meeting, at which this petition was agreed upon, was convened? He had been given to understand, that many gentlemen had attended it as a mark of their affection to his illustrious relative. He did not intend to have addressed the House on the present occasion, but he could not allow the assertion of the right hon. member for Liverpool, to pass unnoticed, that the measure, with which we were threatened, ought to be considered inevitable, because it was quite impossible to make up a cabinet consisting of individuals entertaining opinions opposite to the new opinions of the noble duke and the right hon. Secretary of State. He would advise the member for Liverpool, to recollect a saying of our late venerable monarch, which had now become a matter of history. On a question, on which it was recommended to our late sovereign to change his principles, because he could not find ministers who would govern upon those principles, his majesty said, "Rather than desert those principles, I will go to Charing-cross, and take the first nine or ten men that I meet there with good coats on their backs, as my ministers. I will then throw myself upon the country, and try whether the country will, under such circumstances, desert its sovereign." It was absurd to say, that a government could not be framed out of the ranks of those who opposed further concessions to the Catholics. The right hon. member for Liverpool was guilty of great inconsistency in saying so; for it was only the other night that he had volunteered a compliment to an hon. member near him, and had told him in direct words, that he had proved himself qualified for a seat in the cabinet, by the speech which he had then delivered. There were other gentlemen equally well qualified for such situations. He was speaking of the younger members of the House, not of stupid gray-headed members like himself [a laugh]; and he maintained, that if the country would only evince its determination to adopt the principle of Protestant ascendancy, it would soon find able men enough to govern it upon that principle. Though it might not be easy at first to establish a Protestant administration, the scruples of some gentlemen to such a project, might, perhaps, be removed by taking a trip down to Windsor. Those gentlemen, when their scruples no longer stood in the way of their preferment, might do to stop up a gap in a new administration; and perhaps some other gentlemen might not be so habituated to their new sentiments, as to refuse to turn back to their old ones, when, by so doing, they could regain their old places. And here he would call upon the House to look back at certain events, which had become matter of history. He thought he recollected a time, when an administration, which called itself "All the Talents," declared, without any reserve, that Catholic emancipation should be granted, and when it thought that it was impossible to make up any cabinet that was not determined to grant it. But then, as he had heard, for he was ten thousand miles from England, an individual, of the name of Perceval, did, some how or other, contrive to form a cabinet of eminent statesmen opposed to Catholic emancipation. He had likewise heard, that the Talents said, that all the statesmen who formed that cabinet, were so stupid, that it was quite impossible for them to carry on the government for a year. Yet, that cabinet, even after the head of it had been snatched away by a premature fate, had carried on the government on his principles for sixteen or seventeen years; and on the same principles, had the right hon. Secretary opposite, known his own strength as a Protestant, he might have carried on the government for many a long year to come. He apologized to the House for trespassing on its attention; but he could not quietly sit by and hear an expression so strange as that used by the right hon. member for Liverpool—namely, that this measure was inevitable: just as if the fates had decreed, and man could not resist it, and as if those who took the same part with himself were besotted, demented, or some such thing as that.—One word as to the irritation which was said to pervade the country. The Catholics of Ireland, having agitated as they called it, to the very verge of rebellion, and having publicly declared that they would compel the government to yield to their requests, fully justified him in asserting, that they had ulterior objects in view. If the Catholics would be satisfied with the concessions for which they now clamoured, no one would be more ready than he should be to grant them. But we had the words of their leaders to prove, that they would not be satisfied with such concessions. There was an accumulation of evidence to prove, that the Catholics only wanted admission into the two Houses of parliament, to tear down the Protestant church of Ireland in the first instance; and when that was accomplished, to tear down the Protestant church of England in the next. What had one of the most influential bishops of the Roman Catholic church said upon this very topic? "The church of Ireland must fall; and I like emancipation because that measure will accelerate its fall."

presented a petition, numerously and respectably signed, from the city of Hereford, against further concessions to the Roman Catholics.

said, that the meeting at which it was agreed to was duly convened, and attended by a large number of persons connected both with the city and county of Hereford. There were many magistrates present, many clergymen, and about one or two thousand other persons. The petition was temperately worded, and agreed to by a large majority. Inasmuch as this petition expressed a hope, that the Roman Catholics would not be admitted to seats in either House of parliament, he could not accord with its prayer. Having uniformly felt it to be his duty to support the Catholic claims, and feeling that duty impressed upon his mind more strongly than ever, he should continue to act on the principles which he had formerly espoused.

corroborated the statements of his noble colleague as to the respectability of these petitioners. He regretted that his constituents had not intrusted their petition to himself or his colleague. At the same time, he must be forgiven for saying, that though his noble colleague and himself were opposed to the views of the petitioners, they would have taken as much care of it as the hon. baronet. He was happy to say, that in spite of their differences on political opinions, he had always contrived to live on terms of kindness and friendship with his political opponents in the country. He had frequently said to the gentlemen who had formed Pitt clubs in his county, "Why do you, who oppose yourselves to Catholic emancipation, call your clubs by the title of Pitt clubs? You have no right to use Mr. Pitt's name." To this question_ he had frequently received this answer—"We have a right to use Mr. Pitt's name; for though he was a great friend to Catholic emancipation, he would never have granted it without security." Now, it appeared to him, that the question was at present whether Catholic emancipation was to be carried with such securities as were necessary for the preservation of the Protestant Church. He therefore trusted that when the bill of Relief came under consideration many gentlemen would give it their support who now thought that they must oppose it. He had now to present a petition from a number of freemen of the city of Hereford, of a contrary import from that which had just been presented. It prayed the House to take into its most serious consideration the propriety of conciliating the people of Ireland, by a removal of such grievances as were capable of being redressed, consistently with the preservation of the constitution. This petition was signed by two hundred and fifty of the freemen.

begged to present a petition from a numerous body of the inhabitants of St. Leonard, Shoreditch, which was the result of a public meeting, regularly convened by a requisition from the churchwardens, and held in the vestry. There was, besides, a good deal of discussion at the meeting. Counter resolutions were proposed, and in the event this petition was signed by six thousand seven hundred and sixty-three of the inhabitants, and had it not been that about three thousand more had by mistake signed their name to the general London and Westminster petition, they would have subscribed this document. He had had a personal interview with a deputation from those who had signed it; and never had he met with more sensible or calm people.

The petition was read, and upon the sentence being read, in which the petioners expressed a hope, that the House would not pass any measure that could undermine the stability of the Throne,

said, that from the speech which the learned member for Dublin had made, and the allusion to the sense of the petitioners, he had been disposed to anticipate that this petition was one against any concession to the Catholics; yet, what was his surprise when he had heard it read, to find it was one which every gentleman, who was anxious to have that question settled, could most conscientiously sign; for it expressly desired them not to undermine the stability of the throne. If the learned gentleman had thought proper, at his interview with these intelligent petitioners, to have made the same speech to them that he did half an hour ago to the House of Commons, he was quite sure they would, after listening to such a picture of the dreadful state of society in Ireland, in which all Christian feeling seemed to be almost banished in the intercourse of man with man, have implored the learned gentleman to pause and endeavour to devise some plan by which such dreadful evils might be remedied.

said, there was some dexterity in this mode of selecting an isolated sentence in a petition, and making it the subject of particular remark. If the hon. member, instead of taking that course, had looked at the petition as a whole, and had coupled it with the discussion out of which it had emanated, he would have seen that it plainly declared the incompatibility of the principles of concession with the security of the Protestant constitution.

said, he had shown no forwardness to offer unnecessary observations upon the presentation of these petitions, because he was convinced that the greater the moderation of tone adopted on such times the better. He confessed he felt surprised at the praise which hon. members lavished on efforts of this kind, seeing the notoriety which had been given to the means by which these petitions were got up. He knew a little of the practices which were resorted to. And from that knowledge he would venture to say, that the great majority who signed them knew little or nothing of what they were doing. The invitations to sign were not, "Will you put your name to a Petition against the course recommended in his Majesty's Speech for the consideration of the disabilities affecting his Majesty's Catholic subjects?" but, "Will you sign a Petition against Popery?" There was, likewise, this inducement held out—that every person who signed it should have a printed copy of the luminous Speech of the duke of Cumberland [a laugh]. He wanted to get a copy of this precious oration, but had some difficulty; as the signature to the petition was enforced by some indispensable preliminary. And this was the practice in most of the places where these petitions were lying for signature. He held in his hand a bill which was distributing from these shops at that moment. It began—"People of England, listen to the warning voice of the worthy son of your late great, good, and moral king, of precious and glorious memory, George the 3rd, whom may God for ever bless; who asks you, is this country in future to be a Protestant or a Popish one?—continue silent, and it must become a Popish one—speak out, and it must remain Protestant." If there were any members who thought this was the mode to promote fair and open petitions, he envied them neither their feelings nor their principles. In other parts of the town where anti-Catholic petitions were lying for signatures, men were stationed with large placards, on which were inscribed in large letters "Beware of the Popery petition." These were shameful arts; and he was sorry to say, that many of these petitions were set on foot by clergymen, churchwardens, constables, beadles, sextons, bellringers, and grave-diggers. These petitions were signed by all manner of individuals—by boys who ran about rapidly from place to place, and were busy in all directions scribbling their names. Numbers of the signatures were in the same hand-writing. These were mean and unworthy practices, which disgraced the parties resorting to them. Far was he from saying, that the right of the common people to petition should be restricted within narrow bounds: but this was not the way to exercise any such right: on the contrary, it was the surest mode of bringing that valuable privilege into contempt.

said, that although none could be more anxious than he was, to enable the people to come down with their petitions to that House, he could not tolerate such arts as had been resorted to. It was notorious, that petitions had been got up by dint of statements founded upon some horrid recital of barbarity perpetrated in former times. Upon these London petitions he hoped to be permitted to state, that as the civil affairs of the metropolis were managed by a municipal body annually elected, it was not unreasonable to suppose that such a body spoke the sense of their constituents: and yet the Common Council had, after some discussion, by a majority of two to one, recommended the removal of the penal laws affecting their Catholic fellow-subjects, as the only mode of pacifying Ireland, and giving security to the country at large.

said, that if any hon. mem- ber had taken the same pains which he had done to examine these petitions, he would have found that in almost every petition from the Catholics of Ireland, marks and crosses of all kinds were appended to the names, and the latter were written in forties and fifties by the same individual. In point of numbers, too, hon. gentlemen would find, that public opinion was decidedly against concession. With respect to one observation which had fallen from the worthy alderman, he could have wished, before he attacked the clergymen of England, he had taken the trouble to glance at the movements of the priests of Ireland, and see how the Clare election had been carried on by their influence. In the one cause, the priests were struggling to prolong violence and dissention; while, in the other, the clergy were performing a duty that became them.

presented a petition from the Protestants of the county of Dublin, complaining in the strongest terms, of the conduct of the Catholic Association, of the priests at the Irish elections, and of the spiritual domination which they arbitrarily exercised over four-fifths of the forty-shilling freeholders. This petition was signed by two thousand Protestants of the county of Dublin, among whom were five peers, and a great body of the magistrates, clergy, and most influential Protestants.

gave the assertion relative to the undue influence of the Roman Catholic priests, an unqualified contradiction.

said he could not allow the freeholders of the county of Louth to be maligned by the freeholders of the county of Dublin. Such assertions as were contained in the petition now presented, were evidently intended to impose on the House. He did not owe his election to the influence or intrigues of the Roman Catholic priests; neither had he ever appealed to the religious feelings and prejudices of the people. He would not owe his election to any such influence as had been alluded to; and he was above appealing to the religious passions of the people. If the Catholic priests did exert the influence with the people when the interests of their religion was at stake, they exerted it in a very different manner from that represented; and the Protestant clergy had assuredly set them the example. It should be remembered, too, that the Protestant clergy had less reason to set an example of political interference, seeing that they were protected by a Protestant king, Protestant lords, a Protestant House of Commons, and a Protestant constitution. They were afforded every means of protection, and had therefore little excuse for their conduct. But, was it not incumbent on the Catholic priests, considering their weak and unprotected condition, to endeavour to place in that House some organ by means of which, in the event of their being attacked, justice might be done to them, and their conduct represented in its proper light?

said, that in Ireland a spiritual coercive influence, in the strictest sense of the word, was exercised by the Catholic clergy over their flocks in political matters. He contradistinguished this species of influence from that which they might legitimately possess, in their characters of pastors of a Christian church. He never had denied, and never would deny, to them, or to any other body of men similarly circumstanced, the exercise of that just and legitimate influence over their fellow-man, which their station in society, and the esteem of their followers, entitled them to: but he would never consent to the clergy of any church making use of the spiritual influence which they possessed, to direct and coerce the political opinions of their flocks. A comparison had been made between the conduct of the Protestant and the Catholic clergy, a comparison which he pronounced utterly groundless. The Protestant church did not recognize the principle of coercion, and it was one on which Protestant clergymen would never act. It should be recollected, that the Protestant clergyman was not only a minister of the gospel, but a freeholder and a citizen. In his capacity of freeholder, he had a right to attend at elections, and vote: as a citizen, he had a right to use the influence afforded hint by his station and abilities, not to coerce men's opinions by spiritual tyranny, but to draw them into unison with his own, by means of reason and sound argument. He had no doubt, that to this extent, and by these means—but to this extent and by these means only,—had the Protestant clergy influenced the opinion of the country. The conduct of the Roman Catholic priests was widely different: they used their spiritual influence to work upon the political sentiments of their followers. This was the sound distinction between the conduct of the Protestant and the Roman Catholic clergy. With respect to the unqualified contradiction given by his hon. colleague to the statement relative to the Catholic clergy, of course his hon. friend spoke from the information he had received, and to the best of his belief; but, in answer to this contradiction, he was ready to state from his own personal knowledge, that his hon. colleague was mistaken. He had enjoyed opportunities of knowing the facts, and did not speak from information conveyed to him through third parties. In truth, he had been a member of the committee appointed by the House to try the merits of the petition, presented against the last contested return for the county of Dublin, and one of the grounds on which that petition went consisted in the influence exerted on the voters by the Roman Catholic clergy. He knew that there were witnesses in attendance on that committee, prepared to prove that the Catholic priests did interfere and exercise a coercive influence over the freeholders, by means of spiritual denunciations. It could have been satisfactorily established, that such denunciations were uttered from the altars of the Catholics' chapels, and that threats of refusing the rights of the church to refractory voters were resorted to. The committee appointed to try the petition came to a resolution, that there were not Parliamentary grounds on which to impeach the return: consequently, the evidence to which he alluded was not gone into, but a part of what could have been proved came out on the cross-examination of the witnesses, and it fully sustained the statements now made, and the allegations contained in this petition with respect to the influence exercised by the Roman Catholic priests. The statements in question would be found to be confirmed by the evidence taken before the committee on the county Dublin election, brief as those minutes were.

said, he had not made the statement which he bad done with respect to the Catholic clergy, on information conveyed to him by others, but from his own knowledge. What he had said on the subject was not matter of opinion or conjecture, but of positive evidence. An inquiry was made into the allegation, which was found, after the fullest investigation, to be entirely groundless. The assertion was a part of the disgraceful efforts making to delude the people of England. Those efforts, if he wished to trespass on the time of the House, he could expose in the blackest and most damnable colours. In order to carry such base ends into effect, the right of petitioning had been grossly and infamously abused. Some of the individuals who had made these charges against the Roman Catholic priests, were put to the trial in Waterford, Louth, Dublin, and Monaghan, but they did not succeed in proving their allegations. He did not wish to institute any comparison between the clergy of one church or of the other. He regretted the wild and wicked expressions that had occasionally been used by both, in reference to the political dissentions of Ireland; some of them were such as made a man's blood curdle to think of. When the learned member talked of the Roman Catholic priests, he should have recollected the words used by a minister of the Protestant church when speaking of his fellow-Christians. He should have recollected, that a Protestant clergyman had said, "the curse of Cromwell was too good for the Roman Catholics." The parties who forwarded petitions like the present to the legislature, must have gone to the kennels of Dublin, the Shoreditches of the Irish metropolis, in search of the mass of bigotry and intolerance which they had brought forward.

said, he was satisfied, that the whole bench of Protestant bishops had not so much power over their flocks as was possessed by the humblest Roman Catholic curate over his followers.

said, it was impossible to hear the observations made on both sides, while discussing this question, without feelings of the greatest pain and regret. If the question were to go on, and be made a subject of dissention, as it hitherto had been, when and where were they to find an end? In what part of the country could peace and tranquillity be obtained, so long as this matter remained unsettled? The most unhappy discords and animosities prevailed; every institution of the country, even the dearest rights of Englishmen, were vilified and abused in turn by the opponents and supporters of this question, as it suited their respective ends. The privilege of petitioning, itself, was represented as an evil. Who could sit quietly by and hear such propositions asserted by those who supported or opposed the in tended measures of relief, without feeling distressed at the course adopted, and perceiving the great injury that must be done by the protracted agitation of this question? Who could hear the opinions passed upon the conduct of the clergy, without a strong feeling of the mischief likely to ensue from such discussions? We had heard the Protestant clergy abused for exerting themselves on this subject, and assuming a political character. We had heard the Catholic priests vilified for displaying their spiritual influence for secular purposes. How was all this to end? What good could result from stating, that the Catholic priests had exerted their influence, for the accomplishment of political ends? He believed it was notorious that they had done so: but, as matters now stood, could his hon. friend prevent them from so exerting the influence which they possessed over the minds of the people? Would not the epithets applied to the Catholic priests, provoke those individuals still further, and exasperate existing animosities? What prospect of tranquillity had we, if hon. gentlemen, by their eloquent speeches, were to go on exasperating matters in this manner? He called on his hon. friend, and upon those who thought and acted with him, to look calmly and dispassionately at the question. They would then see the dangers that must arise from a continuation of the present state of things in Ireland, and would not endeavour to influence the minds of the community, and lead them to any unfavourable conclusion on the subject of Roman Catholic relief.

in presenting a petition against concession from Coventry, observed, that it was agreed to at a public meeting of the inhabitants of that ancient city, and had attached to it three thousand nine hundred and fifteen signatures. There was a counter-petition also respectably signed, but by only nine hundred and five persons. It was therefore apparent, that no comparison could be instituted between the petitions for and against the Roman Catholics,—the latter evidently conveying the sense of a large majority of the inhabitants. For himself, he would never consent to have the great bulwarks of our constitution in church and state rudely trampled down, and the Protestant church left naked and defenceless, to the attacks of its ambitious and daring rival.

thought, if ministers introduced a measure that would not endanger the safety of the established church, that the major part of the persons who had signed the petition just presented by his hon. colleague, would willingly concur in it. He said this, partly from what he knew of the spirit that actuated his constituents, and partly from the artifices that were resorted to, in order to procure signatures to the petition. Parties were canvassed as at an election, for their sentiments and signatures, and a bulletin of the two petitions was regularly published, like the state of the poll. The close of the poll was thus announced—"Signatures against Popery, three thousand nine hundred and fifteen; for Popery, nine hundred and five." A number of persons who signed the petition now presented, did so in the belief that they were opposing the establishment of the Popish religion in this country. For himself, he would support a measure calculated, as he conceived, to promote the best interests of this country, and preserve our constitution, as at present established, in church and state.

rose, to present a petition from the county of Leicester, against further concessions to the Catholics. The petition was signed by nineteen thousand one hundred and three persons, among whom were, the lord-lieutenant of the county, the high sheriff, two earls, six baronets, thirty county magistrates, the mayor and corporation of the town of Leicester, one hundred and twenty-five clergymen, and the majority of the gentry, freeholders, and respectable inhabitants of the district. There was a smaller petition of a similar nature, with one hundred and four signatures, which came too late to be embodied with the present. It had been arranged, that no person under fourteen years of age should be allowed to sign the petition, and that no marks should be attached to it. However, there were a few marks annexed to the skins of the petition; but it was only in consequence of the positive determination of the parties not to be excluded from expressing their concurrence in the prayer of the petition by their inability to write, that they were allowed to affix their marks. The majority of the inhabitants of the district were deeply alive on the subject of the petition. That the inhabitants were unanimous in their approbation of it, he did not say: no such thing could be expected. Indeed, he understood there was a counter-petition; but how signed, or to what extent, he could not state. He was sorry to confess, that he had been deceived in the conduct of his majesty's ministers. He could not perceive that they were, in their present mode of acting, influenced by sentiments which ought to induce the members of that House to repose confidence in them any longer. The general argument in favour of the innovation was, that it would tend to tranquillize Ireland. If it were possible to do so even by this concession, no man would more gladly make the experiment; but he could not believe that any such result would follow. Certain letters, no doubt circulars, had been sent to him, penned by the late agent of the Catholic Association, which contained doctrines that must show, that nobody could calculate on the renunciation of all political power and influence over Ireland on the part of the Pope, should the contemplated measure of concession be carried by the legislature. That writer had volunteered the assurance that nothing short of unqualified, unmitigated political concession would be accepted. This gratuitous avowal, by an authorized agent of the Catholics of Ireland, had gone a great way to convince him; and he was convinced further of the possibility of its being perfectly consistent with truth, from reading a lately published Memoir of the Duke de Rovigo, wherein it was proved, that the political influence of the Pope was most effectively opposed to the measures of Buonaparte, at the very period when the Roman Pontiff was carried into France as his prisoner. As long as he felt that this might be again the case—as long as he had their own assurances for it, that no concession, except political concession on the broadest principle, would satisfy the Catholics of Ireland—he must be allowed to act in accordance with the dictates of his conscience.

presented a petition from Leicester in favour of the Catholic claims. The petition had five thousand signatures, which it had received in a day and a half. Its prayer was founded on the principles of civil and religious liberty; and he trusted the day was not far distant when such principles would need no advocate in a British legislature. He hoped shortly to be able to congratulate the petitioners on the success of their prayer, and that he should soon see Mr. O'Connell and other Catholics in their places in that House.

protested against the petition just presented by his hon. colleague, being received as the expression of the sentiments of the people of Leicester, or even of the persons from whom the petition was alleged to have emanated. He was ready to prove, at the bar of the House, that many of those signatures had been surreptitiously obtained—that some of them were actual forgeries. He was as friendly to the right of petition as any man; but he felt it to be his duty to animadvert upon such a mode of obtaining signatures.

stated, that he had received the petition from a gentleman of the highest respectability, who would be incapable of sanctioning such a mode of obtaining signatures. Unless, therefore, his hon. colleague would take it upon himself to state that his allegations were founded on his own personal knowledge of the fact, and not upon hearsay information, he must object to more credence being given by the House to his hon. colleague's assertions than to his own counter assertion; as both were equally founded on private communications. Until his hon. colleague had stated the source whence he derived his information, he must proclaim his assertions to be unfounded.

said, his information would enable him to prove his allegations at the bar of the House, if necessary.

was ready to give the names of the gentlemen from whom he had derived his information concerning the petition, if his hon. colleague would also state the names of his informants.

thought it imperative on the hon. baronet to substantiate his charge at once, by either giving the names of his informants, or by stating his personal knowledge of the facts he had asserted. The House owed it to its own character to call upon the hon. baronet to bear out his strong assertion, that, forgeries were committed in a petition which had been presented to its notice.

contended, that the hon. baronet had no right to state the names of the gentlemen to whom he was indebted for the information.

felt himself bound not to state the names of his informants.

considered the charge made by the hon. baronet to be of so serious a nature, that he was bound to make it good, by at once stating the names of the persons upon whom a forgery had been committed.

said, he had a list at home of the forged signatures. Until he had consulted that list, he could only speak of three names positively as forgeries; namely, those of Cooke, Satin, and Pindar.

, asserted that his hon. colleague was incorrect, so far as the name of Mr. Cooke was concerned; for he had a letter from that gentleman, in which he stated, that he not only signed the petition himself, but would be responsible for the respectability and authenticity of the other signatures.